Believe it or not, things could be even worse, as today’s guest blogger Cyril Eugenovich Galaburda amply demonstrates with reference to the fate of those damned as paedophiles in Russia. Cyril is a physics graduate in his early thirties with advanced knowledge of plasma physics and IT; he has also undertaken postgraduate studies in psychology. From Ukraine, he speaks Russian and English as well as his own native language and has completed a number of ambitious translations into Russian, including the Rind et al. 1998 meta-analysis, Bertrand Russell’s Proposed Roads To Freedom: Socialism, Anarchism and Syndicalism and my own Paedophilia: The Radical Case. I am flattered to find my work in such illustrious company! Cyril’s piece here has been somewhat re-written and condensed, with permission, from the author’s original online version in English.

THE GENOCIDE OF PAEDOPHILES IN RUSSIA

Genocide is a denial of the right of existence of entire human groups, as homicide is the denial of the right to live of individual human beings; such denial of the right of existence shocks the conscience of mankind,.. and is contrary to moral law and to the spirit and aims of the United Nations… The General Assembly, therefore, affirms that genocide is a crime under international law… whether the crime is committed on religious, racial, political or any other grounds…

United Nations General Assembly Resolution 96 (I), 11 December 1946

Genocide is the deliberate destruction, in whole or in part, by a government or its agents, of a racial, sexual, religious, tribal or political minority. It can involve not only mass murder, but also starvation, forced deportation, and political, economic and biological subjugation. Genocide involves three major components: ideology, technology, and bureaucracy/organization.

What the Nazis did to the Jews is accepted as abhorrent. Not just the ultimate evil, the Holocaust, in which millions perished, but also its prelude: the burning of Jewish scriptures, the trashing of Jewish businesses, the imposed wearing of the Star of David, the confinement in ghettos, the slave labour camps and all manner of brutal, degrading and humiliating treatment to which the Jews were systematically subjected, are considered crimes against humanity.

Yet similar treatment of paedophiles finds widespread support. Paedophiles are ruthlessly shut out of mainstream public discourse; denied a voice in the media, they are likewise shunned by publishers and kept off speaking platforms. They face discrimination in employment and housing; public proscription lists of child-lovers guarantee they and their homes will be targeted for hostilities; forced out, and kept homeless by oppressive zoning restrictions, they are made to live like vagrants, exposed to the elements and to further violence; they may be imprisoned for decades or for life, facing abuse and attack, often on a daily basis ; they may be subject to regimes of deliberate psychological abuse and chemical castration. Those who have themselves killed no one may even be killed.

In this article you will learn how to die in Russian-speaking countries.

The Final Solution to the Paedophile Question

I read a terrible anonymous story on an internet forum. The author seems to be a physician:

“My child’s godmother’s friend has a daughter. She was four years old. It was an ordinary evening. The woman wanted the girl to go to bed, and bathed her first. When she was washing the girl’s genitals she noticed that the child was reacting in a weird way: rolling her eyes, trying to trap the mother’s hand between the top of her thighs. If the girl had said nothing, nobody would have found out. But when the mother removed her hand the girl demanded imperiously: “I want more!” Responding to her mother’s silent perplexity, the child said: “Ms So-and-So always does it.” She was referring to a 25-year-old on the kindergarten staff. Nobody went to the police. The girl’s father solved the problem by himself, once and for all. In the gangsters’ manner.”

Only a stupid beast can consider pleasure to be a “problem” worthy of taking a woman’s life. Throughout my childhood my mother yelled at me, beat me, threw me on a floor, kicked me, spat at me, outraged me, and trespassed into my private life, and nobody will punish my mother for it. But the kindergarten worker from the story was kind and tender towards that girl. But all mankind thinks what she did deserves bloodshed. Why?

The Superior Race and the Superior Sexual Orientation

Russia idolizes Alexander Kuznetsoff of St. Petersburg, a giant of a man, a champion boxer jailed three times for drugs offences (marihuana and heroin). On New Year’s Eve at the end of 2007 he killed a young man, a 20-year-old Uzbek. All who had known the victim, Bakhtischod Khajrilaeff, spoke of him as a kind and polite person. But the murderer claimed he had sexually assaulted Kuznetsoff’s eight-year-old stepson.

The murderer said he had been looking for his lost stepson for an hour, but the police said it would have taken two or three hours. The murderer says he noticed the child’s pants in his porch but the police did not find any pants. The murderer says that he found his stepson naked on the porch floor, that Khajrilaeff had his trousers lowered, that he had beaten the Uzbek till the police came. But the police found all of them with their clothes on.

Nobody saw the murderer looking for his stepson. The child had not been raped; but he had been beaten and bitten. By whom? Two weeks later, when the child was questioned, he said the slaughtered Khajrilaeff had done it. Russians praised the murderer. He was in demand for interviews and autographs. Money was raised to help him.

It is so easy to become a hero: all you need to do is kill someone from an ethnic minority, call him a paedophile and make a child confirm the story. (In Russian law the parents must be present when a child is interrogated.) The craziest thing is that the murderer Kuznetsoff was declared a victim!

“The sole criterion needed for a valid self-defence is proportionality between the means used in order to perpetrate the crime and the means used to defend against it,” the murderer’s lawyer said. But Kuznetsoff had suffered “a deep psychological trauma”. This made him “unable to judge a proportionate response”. This had to be taken into account.

The “traumatized” murderer was sentenced to a term of only two and a half years and was released ahead of time in 2010 after giving a written undertaking not to leave his home. It is suspicious that neither his mistress nor the boy he “saved” were there to welcome Kuznetsoff from imprisonment. Now he is free to kill more Uzbeks by branding them paedophiles.

A journalist put out a smear story against Khajrilaeff, saying he was a pervert who had to flee to another city to escape retribution. The basis for this? As a 14-year-old he had allegedly been seen looking at the genitals of some 11-year-old boys. Hardly a compelling case. But, in any event, those who had known the murdered man did not believe he had been a paedophile, nor did his relatives. The Khajrilaeffs think he had been murdered in the course of a robbery: his phone, gold chain, camera and video camera, and all his documents were stolen. It is also known that Kuznetsoff had served a three-year prison term in 1994 for robbing a taxi driver. That time he could not blame his victim for paedophilia.

Kuznetsoff is not the only murderer who has tried to justify himself by turning the blame onto a “paedophile”. Another is paratrooper Alexis Buriloff, who killed a man with a few blows to the head. Now the murderer is crying foul because he is faced with a prison sentence under high security, even though it is only a mere two and a half years – hardly excessive for taking a life! He and his mother are trying to convince everyone that Mr. Buriloff did the deed to protect his little niece from a man who – allegedly – tried to rape and murder her.

The public prosecutor’s representative seems not to believe the murderer’s version: she is appealing against the court’s lenient sentence. But the online reaction of fundamentalists with allegiance to the Russian Orthodox Church goes totally the other way. Here is one such comment:

High security imprisonment!? For sure, the judge has a touch of Jewish blood and gave a sentence aimed at oppressing Russians. Or some relatives bribed her. Actually the paratrooper did not kill, just punched a couple of times. He is not to blame that the weakling did not survive. It is dangerous now to trouble weaklings… Among Jewish scum there are a lot of weaklings. That is how Jewish genes work.

Actually, it is by no means certain the murder victim was Jewish, but Russians respect paratroopers so much that any legal procedure is considered to be a conspiracy against “real Russian men”. Acquitting murderers is demanded for the “protection” of children from Asian perverts. Intolerance towards paedophiles justifies racialist attacks.

The summit of this antisemito-paedophobia was the killing of a foreign pseudo-paedophile in Kharkov. In Russian-speaking countries it is trendy now among neo-Nazis to hunt paedophiles. There are such activists in my city too. They use internet chat to lure a child-lover with the chance to meet a child. A rendezvous is agreed. When the child-lover turns up he will be confronted, filmed and humiliated. Urine will be poured over him; he will be beaten.

In Kharkov a 24-year-old student from Jordan was even killed. Lured by the “paedophile-hunters”, he tried to date a 17-year-old girl. The student cannot be considered a paedophile for this. But living in Ukraine I know that some dislike Arabian immigrants simply for being “lustful”, and for taking “our” girls…

In February, some Kharkov inhabitants saw a bunch of thugs beating the student mercilessly. The witnesses called police but the victim was dead. One of the witnesses tried to stop the murderers but they threatened the passer-by and showed him the victim’s “paedophilic” correspondence.

An 18-year-old called Artemes has confessed. A friend told the press that the Jordanian student had not been the first victim. But he praised his pal:

“Artemes is a good guy! It served that paedophile right! I hope Artemes will be acquitted.”

A couple years ago I was in hospital with a policeman. He bragged about how he had tortured a “paedophile” by leaving him hanging by his hands.

An award-winning musician, accordionist Ingvar Zavadsky, was accused of having overly friendly relations with boys. He says he had his testicles squashed during an interrogation. It is considered commonplace for the police to hit peoples’ heads with heavy books, break their fingers with a door, use electrical current or just beat detainees black and blue. These are regarded sincerely as “acts of humanity”, necessary to prevent dangerous criminals from getting away with their crimes.

Sometimes police “humanity” goes too far.

On the 19th of November 2014, in Ekaterinburg, 33-year-old Sergio Yegoroff, suspected of intimacy with an eight-year-old boy, hanged himself in the investigatory jail. According to Sverdlovsk Committee of Inquiry “criminal negligence led to the situation in which the accused committed suicide” but there was “no evidence that the death has features of crime”.

“In order to arrest him the Criminal Investigation Department workers feigned a traffic accident as a reason to detain Yegoroff. They had had no testimony from the child, but used a blurred video and tortured him, beating statements out of him.”

Yegoroff’s mother says that at the time the crime was supposed to have taken place, her son was at work, as could be corroborated from three security cameras (two in the street, one into his workplace).

“He was found”, the mother says, “scratched, with bruises and his eye beaten out. For sure, he didn’t kill himself…

“As I got to know later, he had been tortured for 24 hours. He had been beaten and threatened with a gun. Their lawyer, Mr. Vinogradoff, phoned me and wanted me to bring him 150,000 roubles because my son had been caught red-handed and would be imprisoned for 20 years.”

The jail administration has said that on the day in question there were twelve people with Yegoroff in the cage, so it was impossible to hang oneself without being noticed.

The Minotaurs In The Maze

The state’s persecution of child-lovers is no less appalling than that of the amateur thugs. You can go to prison just for kissing a willing child’s backside. Then in prison you will be branded a “sex offender” and everyone will assume you rape kids.

Everyone knows that child-lovers are systematically exploited, beaten and raped by the other prisoners. And that means really raped. You will be held by two men and a third will pull you down. You may have your teeth beaten out to satisfy your oppressors in a French way. From this moment to speak with you is to be persecuted equally with you. You will eat and walk apart from the others. You will be made to clean toilets on pain of death. Nobody will care that you never treated children in the way you are treated by your cellmates.

The journalist and criminologist Alexander Kutschinky writes that child-lovers rarely survive before being transported from an investigatory jail to a penal colony. Then they are packed into prison buses so tightly they die during the journey; these fatalities are explained as “heart attacks”.

Also in Russia a paedophile was butchered by prisoners atrociously: beaten to a pulp and a huge stick thrust into his anus. His relatives (what must they have felt!) saw that his eye had been beaten out.

A news announcer even appeared to condone what had happened, wrapping up his description of the case with these words of crass complicity:

“The way you treat people, that’s how you can expect them to treat you.”

But the murder victim had killed no one, nor had he been violent. He was not getting his “just deserts”. Paedophile-haters lie and live in their lie. Paedophile-haters kill but do not call themselves killers. That’s how it is in Russia.

THE FURORE OVER PROFESSOR DERJAGIN

T. O’C. adds: Cyril has also written an English-language page about an extraordinary episode seemingly far removed from the brutally violent horrors described above, but which is nevertheless also indicative of what is going on in Russia. This concerns a storm whipped up over forensic criminologist Professor Gennadium Derjagin’s allegedly scandalous views and writings on paedophilia.

Here is an edited taster paragraph:

Russia’s Ministry of Internal Affairs (MIA) had to make excuses for the scandal concerned with the publication of a course of lectures, “Criminal Sexology”, by the Head of Subfaculty of Forensic Medicine and Law in Severny State Medical University, Gennadium Derjagin. Bloggers found out that this textbook had propagandized paedophilia as a normal and natural phenomenon and that the book would be studied by future police officers. Out of hand, the MIA gave an assurance that the course had not yet been mounted for the students of Moscow MIA University and that the author no longer worked there, according to ITAR-TASS.

Share this:

Like this:

Related

Must say that I’m not so big IT specialist and I haven’t graduated as a psychologist but no matter. In my article I ventilated some very important observations. Historians and politicians describe genocides as groundless and nonsensical. But those who provide a genocide never think they persecute innocent people.
* Russian sexopathologist Professor Mr. Vasigltschenko, the translator of Richard von Kraft-Ebing into Russian, seems to be the author of the “paracentral lobules” syndrome theory. Child sexuality is considered as a result of a brain lesion. Such a (or any) child is given to imprinting. If (s)he is sexually satisfied by an adult man the child will grow up as a geronto- or homophile. Modern Russian sex science (in the person of Michael Meyerovich Bejglkin, Prof. Andrew Eugenovich Lytschko) and sex politics (Mr. Milonoff & Ms. Mizulina laws) consider it necessary to protect children from homosexual practice and propaganda. So homophobia defends children.
* In Nazi Germany “Der Giftpilz” comic book was issued. Jews are described as pedophiliac serial killers there. So anti-Jewish genocide defends children.
* In February 1903 in a Kherson Region city a dead 15-years-old boy was found. Russian Empire government was deeply Christian so real murderer was released and the murder was said to be ritual. This case provoked the Kishinev anti-Jewish Pogrom. So anti-Jewish pogroms defend children.
* That’s not the only case. In 1823 42 Vitebsk Province Jews were accused in ritual child killings. They’d been imprisoned for eight years until the Council of State released them regardless of the Senate, Caesar Nicholas I and Russian Orthodox Church efforts. The Church tried to prove bloody character of Jewish religion and invented Saint Gabriel of Bialystok murdered in childhood during a Jewish ritual. So anti-Jewish discrimination defends children.
* From 1984 there was a big panic in US. Americans had believed that Satanists torment children during sadistic rituals, that Satanists mole into child care centers, that 4-years-old children were tormented with pilers and swords by Satanists, that abducted children were kept in near-earth orbit or in the ships guarded by trained sharks. So anti-Satanist slender defends children.
* Medieval Europeans believed that witches use baby fat for levitation, for flying to Shabbat orgy. For instance, in the “Malleus Maleficarum” it is written that in Bern Region fat of 13 children had been melted by the witches, that devils had inspired them to kill mostly non-baptized children. So witch hunt defends children.
* Modern theologians struggle against religious freedom by charging Pagans with baby oblations in Carthago or ancient Russia. Russian Orthodox Church used to torment and burn Old Belief heretics blaming them in rituals with use of baby hearts. So religious intolerance defends children.
* According to “Octavius” by Minucius Felix ancient Romans believed that early Christians provided orgies with people of all ages and all the Christian neophytes were made to knife a baby hidden in flour. So anti-Christian crucifixions defend children.
ANY GENOCIDE IS JUSTIFIED AS CHILD PROTECTION. Anti-pedophiliac genocide also.

I’m posting my response to Lensman’s response in the discourse between him, myself, and Feinmann0 here to prevent the WordPress spaghetti effect.

If we refuse to acknowledge that paedophobic countries or people can be paedophobic in different ways and to different extents then we lose a useful analytical tool: why, despite it being paedophobic, has hysteria failed to ignite in my country as it has in the UK? This question can only be asked if we are ready to look closely and acknowledge the different experiences of paedophiles and, yes, paedophobes in different countries.

I don’t deny this, my galactic lawman friend. I think the operative phrase in this discussion is “pedophobic countries can be pedophobic in different ways.” My point was that an outright totalitarian nation, and one that puts up the pretense of democracy, need to be pedophobic in different ways. As I noted, Western bourgeois democracies like the U.S. and U.K. use methods such as censorship, threats of job loss or dismissal from a university, and media demonization (including often brutal doxxing of personal information and “calling out” over social media) in place of being thrown in jail. Is one worse than the other? I’l let individual readers decide, but I would argue that both can thoroughly destroy one’s life and career, even if in different ways. And the threat of either are very effective in discouraging opposition among scientists, journalists, politicians, academicians, and lay citizens.

Can nations be pedophobic to different extents? Of course they can, and that is not something I tried to refute either. I simply believe that totalitarian nations and those that purport to be democratic (actually, in today’s world, plutocracies with a nominal democratic legal & political system) need to be analyzed from different perspectives rather than debating over which one is ultimately “more” pedophobic or “worse” for Kind folks than the other. Can some individuals be pedophobic to different extents? Absolutely. There are conventional mainstream thinkers and there are outright antis, and this will certainly not be disputed by me.

From a Russian associate of mine, under the old Soviet Union, incest and sex between adults and at least pubescent children, was common. They also were very relaxed about nudity and open masturbation.

Under President Putin (whom I actually admire internationally), the Russian Federation has become conservative, with nationalists (ie. fascists) much against even him. As a result, tolerance for also homosexuals has become instead extremely ugly.

A last point: Russian men are very macho and near rape of women is very common. And amongst the older generation, anal penetration was their only option, as the Soviet Government banned condoms.

Watching this video, It seems homosexual teens are fair game for these ‘pedo hunters’…They also use ‘suspicion’ of paedophilia to attack homosexuals, Even when they’re minors themselves…Lovely bunch!
The other documentary is called HUNTED which I can’t seem to find at present

Sadly, the government or media utilizing the “pedophile panic” to attack LGBT people is one of the main things that cause them to go out of their way to politically distance themselves from Kind people, and to join in on the hatred towards us every chance they get to “prove” they see absolutely no parallel between our situation and their own. They thus make many LGBT people, especially those who are politically active, feel that they have no choice but to directly indulge in the “hate game” themselves to deter the hatred away from themselves and onto an even less popular group.

Sometimes I actually envision an LGBT activist publicly condemning Kind people at a conference for improving tolerance to their group, and then later patting me on the shoulder while saying, “Hey, nothing personal, dude. It’s just politics.” *Sigh*

That’s nonsense, as most gay rights activists under forty won’t even know anything about paederasty or the very possibility of child love. The older ones knew about it and so protested a little when the Lebsian-led purges came along.

All LGBT activists are the enemy not just of the ‘minor’ attracted but of everything which is beautiful and worthwhile in life. They are literally evil.

That’s nonsense, as most gay rights activists under forty won’t even know anything about paederasty or the very possibility of child love. The older ones knew about it and so protested a little when the Lebsian-led purges came along.

All LGBT activists are the enemy not just of the ‘minor’ attracted but of everything which is beautiful and worthwhile in life. They are literally evil.

Seriously, Sappho? I don’t mean to get snarky, but I cannot respond in a fully respectful way to this, but I’m not going to give into the temptation to “lose it” and just respond in anger. I believe that won’t help matters any, and my point is to get you to listen to me, which you understandably won’t do if I just shout you down. Here is how I feel about it. Blaming any single group of people as “evil” or 100% full of ignorance is wrong. Our enemies are the following intangibles: ignorance, fear, raw emotionalism, and hatred. Promoting the same thing in response to receiving it just compounds the problem, and causes us to give up the moral high ground. You can’t fight hatred with hatred, and it can corrupt us as readily as it can anyone else from any other group of people.

I understand you’re very angry over the situation we find ourselves in now. I am also, trust on me on that, my friend. It’s important, however, to channel that anger into positive pursuits, and not give in to the same type of attitude that the worst antis and hate-mongers of any group of people direct at us. LGBT people run the full moral gamut of all human beings, with the same individual and collective capacity for both greatness and hatred. Not all of them feel the same as the expediency-seeking political activists among their number who attack Kind people to deter hatred away from their own group. I’ve met my share of LGBT people who empathize with us, and there are many good and thoughtful people among their number. But they are, first and foremost, human, and we need to expect them to be vulnerable to the same temptations under certain forms of political pressure as anyone who happens to be white, male, heterosexual, and teleiophile.

I ask you to keep all of the above in mind whenever your anger tempts you to label an entire group of people “evil”, and basically write them off as potential friends and allies entirely. That only shows that we, too, are as capable of giving into raw emotion, ignorance, and hatred as any other group of people. Welcome to the human race, my friend; let’s not forget that we all share the same foibles and weaknesses, as well as the same potential strengths.

Well, my friend, for the length of your reply, I don’t think you do justice to Cid’s points – or even your own. For one, he considers activists, not the entire group. For another, is it warranted to assume political pressure?

GBLTs are supported by the state and media in Sweden and Denmark, yet the Danes excluded pedophiles in the 80s, while Swedish, together
with American and British, activists spearheaded the effort to exclude pedophiles from ILGA, eventually gaining the coveted UN observer status for their national organization.

Cid’s reaction is understandable, in light of such purges. Colorful language aside, it’s a refusal to work with the enemy.

How would you defend yourself against enemies with holy motives, be they Russian, or British, thugs out for our blood, or GBLT activists condemning MAPs?

Well, I am a person who may compare the Russian and the Western situations quite objectively, since I, living in Russia, is the kind of person which one maverick Russian philosopher described as a “virtual immigrant” – this is, a man who are always in an intellectual contact with a Western culture via informational networks and more immersed in a Western stuff than a Russian one. This description fits me well, since I indeed have more interest in a European and American affairs than in Russian ones, since the Western life, despite all the negative sides it have, are still, on average is better than the Russian one – including the aspects of this life that are relevant for the child-adult sex issues.

Before proceeding further, I need to add that I’m an unusual kind of “virtual immigrant”. Most Russians of such type have uniquely white-washed and idealised perception of the West, which they consider to be a kind of divinely beneficial stronghold of True Democracy and Human Rights. Such “naïve Westernism” is typical among Russian liberals and is easily explained by the self-imposed learning restrictions of them: while having access to the whole field of diverse and conflicting Western worldviews, they limit themselves only to “mainstream” and “moderate” Western stuff, dismissing the “fringe” and “radical” one without a slightest attempt of scrutiny. As for me, my basic principle of learning is all-inclusiveness and absence of preconceived notions: in any controversy, I always critically examine ALL viewpoints, including the ones that are dismissed by “mainstream” as “nutty” and “loony” – such as, say, a “crazy” position that sexual relations between children and adults can be harmless and consensual for both participants.

This width of perceptive is exactly the condition which allows me to compare treatment of contrarians, dissidents, rebels and mutineers of different kinds – from political to scientific – In the Western countries and in Russia. In the West, such treatment is harsh and ugly; but in Russia, it is even harsher and uglier. Let me provide you with some specific example.

In the West, there is a large anarchist movement, with many participants being overt and explicit militants – that is, the people who advocate violent struggle against the state, and, sometimes, actively participate in it – for example, by forming “black blocs” and fighting against the police during mass protests. These guys are openly arguing for their views in the Web, and even publish books. In Russia, such militant resistance to the state is simply impossible: after the last mass disorders of 2011 –2012 years, law enforcement and (counter-)intelligence services had simply obliterated almost any form of anti-state struggle, leaving only the most mild, meek, pacifist protesters. Nowadays, any kind of illegal and combative resistance to authorities is virtually impossible in Russia. There is some unpleasant signs that even a legal and peaceful protest may become a hazardous practice as well –a recently a nonviolent protester was prosecuted for simply waking with a banner; there are a clear attempt to create a new repressive structure – a “National Guard”, which may be legally allowed to use weapons in any situation. Modern Russia is definitely not a place for revolutionaries…

In a West, there is relatively well-known and quickly-growing “anti-psychiatry” (or “critical psychiatry”) movement, which is constantly work to undermine current diagnostic theory, therapeutic practice and institutionalised status of coercive orthodox psychiatry, and receive a lot of positive responses from academicians and members of general public. In Russia, the intellectual dominance of traditional psychiatry is nearly absolute, and coercion performed by psychiatrists is near-anonymously supported.

In a West, there is a libertarian wing of a youth right movement, which rejects the mainstream “child protection” and argue for giving children and adolescents liberties, not just rights – including sexual liberties. While this is certainly a “fringe” position, it is, at least, does exist – while in Russia such perspective is entirely non-existent. There are no Russian radical organisations, like the American ASFAR and NYRA, which argue that kids deserve freedom and self-determination, not restrictive “defense” from everything and everyone.

In a West, official narratives of significant events like 9/11 attacks are questioned by a noticeable number of people, including denizens of academia: 9/11 Truth Movement is a living example of this. In Russia, in the early 2000s some people start inquiring whether terroristic acts, which, according to the official narrative, were performed by insurgents from Chechnya – and were quickly stopped by authorities: their books were forbidden by authorities and any further discussion suppressed.

In the West, scientists managed to conduct research in the hotly debated fields like parapsychology within the walls of academia, and sometimes even publish the results of their research in high-level mainstream publications. In Russia, academic research into anything anomalous was almost eliminated since mid-2000s. In this time, academic study of alternative medicine was destroyed as well, while in the West such study, despite all furious debate around it, are actively conducted.

I want to make clear that here I neither support nor criticise any of the controversial topics mentioned above. These examples are here only to demonstrate that “fringe” and “radical” positions may be advocated openly in the West. Of course, such advocacy is perilous, and an advocate might pay a price – be it the loss of academic reputation (and, with it, the avenues of funding and support, the possibilities of promotion and career) in the case of a scientific or scholarly heterodoxy, or the real chance to become the target of authorities’ unfriendly attention (and with it, harassment, intimidation, isolation, persecution, and so on) for ones engaging in political militancy. But, despite all the perils, a Western (wo)man can still stand against the mainstream – while in Russia, such stance is either almost impossible or simply non-existent.

The comments are also worth reading. Several are along the lines of “When I was 13, I could only fantasize of banging a hot piece of ass like her” — hardly surprising, given Vera’s rather striking appearance in the photos, which are also no doubt the reason why the story has been picked up and run with by the Latin American press. Several more, however, take the “pervert” and “child scarred for life” line, and ‘dan’ writes: “society wants to ‘excuse’ the women, and fry the men. though in reality, young girls can find men attractive, though many refuse to believe this. truth is it’s actually worse when it’s a woman. women AREN’T suppose to find BOYS attractive. by natural biology women are suppose to be attracted to MEN, to males who can provide for them and their children. when it comes to YOUTH, they are suppose to have a mothering instinct. when they go AGAINST what should be their nature, there’s a problem, a BIG problem. these are the same women you see in the news killing their own children.” Dan apparently feels quite strongly about this, because he has posted the comment twice.

In The Gay Revolution: The Story of the Struggle, Lillian Faderman writes: “When a 7-year-old girl was abducted, raped and murdered in 1954, one of the first targets of police investigation (under the logic that ‘sexual perverts’ were capable of any perversion) was Miami’s ‘Powder Puff Lane’. Police en masse swooped down on the gay bars and hauled everyone off for questioning. Needless to say, the little girl’s homicidal rapist was not found among the gay bar patrons; but the homosexual nature of the bars and the names of the arrestees, along with their addresses and places of employment, were printed in the papers — by now a common occurrence in American cities.” As described here https://filmbunnies.wordpress.com/2011/01/30/the-child-molester-1964-the-highway-safety-foundation-beyond-the-road/ , when a youth of 18 murdered two girls of 7 and 9 in Ohio in 1962, police seized upon his mention of having sex with men in a park toilet and, according to Ohio librarian Boyd Addlesperger, “used the crime as pretence for ridding the city of homosexuals.”

There is something sick in the Western mind regarding sex. The Supreme Court here in the US said it is ok for youth to play violent video games, but porn is something that will warp their minds.

Facebook will ban girls in bikinis, yet allow gore and violent images. There was a recent case where a man killed his ex and posted the images to Facebook and when the family found them, Facebook refused to take them down until they learned the killer had hacked the deceased woman’s account. Show a chunky girl in a bikini and they’ll summarily remove it.

For many adults, sex is worse than violence or death, which for the life of me, I cannot understand. If you press the argument, you are suddenly looked upon as a deviant yourself, which chills debate. I do not see the situation improving at all and with the recent election campaign, ignorance and hatred are making an even larger comeback.

The difference between the situation in Russia and in the UK is that the Russian mob carry out those brutal actions which the British mob merely fantasise about carrying out.

Why is that? Has the situation suddenly deteriorated in Russia? Wasn’t Putin filmed kissing the belly of a little boy not so long ago – and all those youtube videos of Russian children running around in just their knickers? I’d formed a vague impression from such videos that Russians were more accepting of child sensuality and sexuality than the Anglosphere…

I’m wondering whether corruption isn’t a contributing factor. Corrupt administrations survive through populism and pandering to the basest elements in their population.

Though the UK is not entirely free of corruption, the police and the legal system are essentially meritocratic and therefore can be more independent of public opinion, and also have more professional standards and better quality recruits. Having decent wages also means that police and officials are more likely to maintain an attitude of proffesionalism and not be tempted towards corruption and the bending/ignoring of rules – all factors which may lead the police and courts to turn a blind eye to the abuse of paedophiles and those accused of being paedophiles.

And once the mob learn that they can act with impunity, or with tacit approval of the community and authorities, then we quickly end up with a situation such as happened with the epidemics of lynchings of blacks in the Southern States of the USA.

Fair point, feinmann0 – I guess that what I meant was that that things seem a lot worse for paedophiles in Russia than in the UK. But would you really say that things are as bad for paedophiles in the UK as in Russia?

I’m sure that if the same levels of corruption and lawlessness prevailed in the UK it would be no different to Russia. But for all its faults, I think the UK is still significantly a less bad place to live than Russia for paedophiles – no paradise, of course.

I suppose it comes down to a question of the relative frequency of such brutal attacks the respective countries and how the legal system deals with them.

It would be interesting to read the impressions of someone who has lived in both countries recently. Has Cyril lived in the UK?

“… would you really say that things are as bad for paedophiles in the UK as in Russia?” Would you go to a crowded area in a UK town and announce through a megaphone that you are sexually attracted to kids? As a pro-paedophile rights individual, would you publicise your UK address on a social media channel such as Cart O’Graph or Antipedophobe Aktion channels? Would you admit to having downloaded child pornography in a UK prison? Can you trust any GP or mental health professional not to inform the police once you advise them that society’s reaction to your sexual orientation is causing problems for you? Can you be sure that your closest friends and family will ever speak to you again once you out yourself to them? I would say that most democratic countries around the world are bathed equally in anti-paedophile hysteria right now. Coming second to the US, Russia just happens to be one of the worst offenders when it comes to its Human Rights record, in my humble opinion, but then ’twas ever thus.

I hear the rustling of provender and feel that my previous comments are taking on a distinctly stramineous and hominid aspect 😉

To say that ‘x is worse than y’ is not to say that ‘X is bad and y is good’. Being hit in the face with a Doctor Scholl wood-sole sandal (hence my slightly crooked nose) is better than being hit over the head with a millstone – but neither is good or desirable.

Richard Dawkins was similarly criticised when he made a distinction between rape and the ‘mild paedophilia’ he experienced when a teacher put his hands down his pants.

To lump all paedophobes and all paedophobic countries as being equally culpable and equally oppressive, in an identical manner, is to eliminate our capacity for making fine distinctions – and I’d argue that it is in these fine distinctions that the most interesting questions, and therefore answers, probably lie.

I, myself, live in an unquestionably paedophobic country (a WEIRD country so, de rigeur, ‘paedophobic’).

However my country is significantly less paedophobic than the UK, and, going by Cyril’s article and Explorer’s comment, it is definitely less brutally paedophobic than Russia.

However, there is no way I would “go to a crowded area in [my] town and announce through a megaphone that [I was] sexually attracted to kids”.

The question ‘Would you go to a crowded area in [your] town and announce through a megaphone that you are sexually attracted to kids?’ is a good one for distinguishing whether a country is paedophobic or not, but it is not a great one for distinguishing levels of paedophobia.

Announcing my paedophilia publicly in my home town on market day would probably be very bad for my social life and for my career, but I’m pretty certain I’d emerge alive, but I suspect if I did the same thing in Russia it would be literal suicide.

If we refuse to acknowledge that paedophobic countries or people can be paedophobic in different ways and to different extents then we lose a useful analytical tool: why, despite it being paedophobic, has hysteria failed to ignite in my country as it has in the UK? This question can only be asked if we are ready to look closely and acknowledge the different experiences of paedophiles and, yes, paedophobes in different countries.

If we refuse to allow ourselves to distinguish between the nature and extent of the paedophbobia in countries such as Russia, the UK and, let’s say, Lichtenstein – we are enacting the same coarsening in our thinking that we witness in those who attack and persecute us.

In a nutshell, when you research attitudes in Nudity (and child nudity) probably the less pedophobic are the warmer countries in Europe — Remember looking into CP and Europe-wide punitive action; Places like Spain were seen as amber, as in, Not doing enough, and not enough restrictive measures: Maybe something to do with the weather, and many communities have a pool, and families always photo their kids — Often naked — Maybe there’s a connection there. Don’t get me wrong, pedophobia is everywhere — In Spain, few years ago, a dad was set upon be small lynch-mob because they thought he was a paedophile!

At least their fair there…There was a documentary about the lives of homosexuals living in Russia, And they are subject to the same treatment: Vigilantes go around meeting up with men, Then five of them will film and subject their victim to ridicule, it was an unpleasant viewing. Again, they use children and ‘paedophilia’ as an excuse to abuse homosexuals, attacking sex education and acceptance of minority orientations as dangerous to children, So while they ‘protect children’..they get away with torturing people with impunity!

I look at it this way, Lensman. The U.S. and the U.K. (along with other Western nations) have a different tactic in oppressing unpopular beliefs and individuals than Russia. The latter is “out of the closet” as a totalitarian system, so it’s pretty overt in its repression, without trying to disguise such tyranny as something else. With nations that put up a pretext for being democratic, however, they need to carry out oppression differently. This often leads to social, media, and job-related consequences rather than simply being busted and thrown into prison (as Explorer noted). Yes, technically you are allowed to challenge the mainstream here in the West, but if you challenge it too far, your words are censored and marginalized to the point that few individuals in these nations even know the alternative view exists. Since the media is mostly corporate-controlled here, all the administrators must do is claim that what you said was “inappropriate” based on how often the “flag” button was used on your posts or blog, and then it’s gone. And if you piss off law enforcement in these nations enough, including if you’re what police refer to as a “political pedophile,” they will not hesitate to frame you or go to elaborate lengths to infiltrate your life and set you up for a fall. These agents of the law are confident that mass hatred of Kind folks is still high enough that they can count on most of the public either not caring or being too afraid to speak up when a MAP is railroaded, thus creating the illusion that what they are doing is fully sanctioned.

The fear of being ostracized and having your career destroyed on “ethical” grounds for speaking loudly about something that is unpopular take the place of being thrown into jail, but are still very effective in keeping the vast majority quiet about certain opinions. The same goes for the very real fear of being set up by the law or thrown to the wolves by the media.

At the risk of my response turning to the finest spaghetti, I will add my response to LSM here.

“If we refuse to allow ourselves to distinguish between the nature and extent of the paedophbobia in countries such as Russia, the UK and, let’s say, Lichtenstein – we are enacting the same coarsening in our thinking that we witness in those who attack and persecute us.”

Well, yes, providing you have sufficient knowledge of the way things are in other places, and also, of that of your own place. This is why first-hand testimony from the likes of Cyril Eugenovich Galaburda, Explorer, et al is so important to increase one’s knowledge of what it is like for sexual minority groups elsewhere, and to make finer, more considered comparisons.

Re comparisons, I agree wholeheartedly with Dissident who says: “The U.S. and the U.K. have a different tactic in oppressing unpopular beliefs and individuals than Russia.” Both tactics when used to discriminate against sexual minority groups, violate basic human rights and demonstrate to me that fascism is alive and well in these allegedly ‘democratic and free’ places.

The sooner robust laws are implemented to uphold an individual’s right to privacy and to uphold an individual’s right to be protected against discrimination on the basis of his or her sexuality, the sooner we shall see some of the poisons in the totalitarian mud we are forced to inhabit, seeping out. The inexorable lessening of protection and increasing intrusion however suggests that the scary fictional future Orwell so brilliantly envisaged has become reality. I mean just look at what those that have all the power in the US have been up to: youtube.com/watch?v=IOksJKfapVM

I would compare the difference between the UK/US paedophobia and the Russian one to the difference between a police state (for instance, a bonapartist regime) and fascism. In a police state, the big media are quietly controlled, and those who dissent cannot find their way to publish in them; if you express your opposition too loudly, you can loose your job, have your kids expelled from public school, or be put under house arrest. In fascism, as soon as you dare to express—even quietly— a dissenting opinion, you are killed or sent to a concentration camp.
So you cannot call UK/USA “fascism”.

I would basically agree that the U.S. and U.K. are not (at this point in time, at least) bona fide fascist nations. However, I do agree that some of their legislation, particularly that which is geared towards individuals indicted on charges related to “terrorism” or “pedophilia,” are borderline fascist. In other words, I believe there can be near-fascist legislation within the framework of a democratic legal system, and this invariably leads to increases in such legislation as a growing degree of moralistic justification for it is made by lawmakers and media fear-mongers. This results in the public becoming more and more willing to believe that certain democratic safeguards need to be thrown out in order to “protect” us from some horrific menace. This type of scapegoating and fear-mongering are often used to gradually eat away at a democratic framework and replace it with exponentially more draconian legislation in its place.

The fact that possession or even simple viewing of images of child eroticism are practically the sole exception to anti-censorship legislation that many purportedly democratic countries espouse is a good example of this. Being indicted for simply looking at such imagery (or, as in Canada, simply reading fictionalized accounts of it in text) can be used to not simply fire you from a job or expel you from a university, but to throw you into prison for a longer period of time than if you burglarized a home or even committed an act of murder. Though the entire system isn’t fascist, I would certainly argue these individuals laws within the system can be categorized as such.

“You and I are responsible for what you and I can do — and what we do. We have no moral responsibility for what other people do that we can’t effect. We may hate it but we can’t do anything about it. Like, we could have a debate, a discussion right now about the crimes of Genghis Khan. And we might be correct about it. It would have no moral value whatsoever. Might have some historical value. Same with the crimes that are going on in Sri Lanka. Can’t think of anything to do about ’em, fine — then have an academic seminar but don’t think it has any moral value. When you tell me what the Taliban can do, it’s exactly the same. The moral value of that is zero.” Noam Chomsky

There is a shrill and angry nationalism in Britain. Those in my working class/council house/lower-middle class area ( I don’t know what they would call it now ) who will be voting “leave” from the European Union do so because they are angry over lowering living standards, some of their labour undercut by immigrants from Eastern Europe, compounded no doubt by a vague awareness of their own alienation within their communities, and not because they give a damn about ancient liberties or the poetry of Shakespeare and A. E. Housman. They were celebrating the monarch the other day with their flags because she is the Nation’s Favourite Grandmother, and not because they care about a constitutional monarchy. The word frequently repeated is ‘Rotherham’, encapsulating the two themes one hears all the time of paedophile cover-ups and the incompatibility of Islam in this country. These same folk are of course perfectly happy with the Americanisation of British life and language, loving Macdonalds and Kentucky Fried Chicken more than anything, so we know it’s bullshit as touching the cultural aspect. I doubt they give much of a shit about their ‘own’ culture.

What Islam has done to them, I honestly don’t know. An alien on Mars would look down and see that Western Liberal society has killed and caused misery to way, way more Muslims than vice versa. Afghanistan was on the hippy trail in the sixties, with a traditional society governed by a Marxist monarchy. Afghan women could even vote a year before American women. Then the United States and the Soviet Union, two socialist tyrannies, used the country as a punching bag for their proxy war. Carter funds freedom fighters against the Soviets, who take over the country, but are so hated that the Taliban is welcomed in. The Taliban receive their funding from Saudi Arabia, who are propped up and only have their prestige because of American money. It all goes back to American money. So, one of those freedom fighters was of course Osama Bin Laden, who was in the country before the Taliban arrived. They Taliban were given billions by the United States so as to groom them for an oil pipeline. September 11 is carried out by some obscure cell of Saudi Arabians calling themselves Al Qaeda with tentative links to their spiritual leader, and rather than negotiate for the extradition of Bin Laden, the United States destroys Afghanistan. This is really just to show off how powerful they are to China. Then they invade Iraq for no reason. They destroy their society, already threadbare following the evil United Nation’s sanctions famously described as genocide by the guy in charge, deliberately riding shotgun with local thugs who incite sectarian disputes between Shia and Sunni. This is War of Aggression for which the Nazi’s were hanged, and “the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole”. But really it’s just the arabs fault. Eventually Isis mutate out of this and get the electricity and water running, but are very extreme, even if their destruction of monuments is clearly exaggerated for Western propaganda. When Democracy Now interviewed those civilians fleeing Baghdad, they turned out to be scared not of Isis, who had said they would respect all both Sunni and Shia, but bombing from their own government propped up by the Americans. Isis then invade Syria, and the United States funds them and other groups that join them, because they despise the independent regime there. Then morally righteous liberals call this “misguided” and “mistaken” foreign policy. Those like Tony Blair, Obama and Owen Jones go around wrapping themselves in political correctness, the false friend of tolerance, saying Islam is a “religion of peace”, and inventing the word Islamophobia, which they warn against even as they continue to kill Muslims. Then some bigot starts saying things about the clash of civilisations and breaks through the political correctness, and the masses go wild for him. Meanwhile, Osama Bin Laden’s group Al Qaeda ( never some kind of a Bond villain’s corporation ) goes from about five guys in the desert with a few working kalashnikovs to an international menace. THis is all the hatred against the United States and its allies, which spreads through some of the mosques, finding the occasional Muslims at a loose end who are then radicalised into carrying out some attack. Then there’s the numbers which are inflated by the police who set up attacks by seeking out weak individuals. It’s a huge con.

So, we see the way in which the blood-soaked liberal mascots of women and ‘gay’ rights is used to justify being at war with that part of the world which is predominately Islamic. Makes me sick! Of course, the grim images of the deformed Iraqi children from American weapons were never released over the media ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RNi_1pbSqGY ) : One can almost imagine a group of latte sipping, Apple-clutching, drain-pipe jean wearing epicene young men of the kind we see these days genuinely not understanding what is wrong with the kids, and saying how they were just, in the words of the soulless queen of neoliberal tat Lady Gaga “born that way”. And then accusing me of being “phobic towards deformities”. Seriously, this SICK PARADE of deformities we are shown on television now. “The man without a face”, and “How I got over the fact that I have three eyes and learned to love myself because I’m brilliant”. It’s so perverse. Whereas if a beautiful boy walked past obviously erotic, an image celebrated in the Rennaiissance and in Classical times, it would be THE MOST SHOCKING THING! This is truly a perverse culture we are living in, but it seems I am the only one who can see it. On this “The Morning Show” with some awful ‘PHILLIP SCHOFIELD”, whoever he is I don’t know, all sympathetic to this murderer, when a man in a loving relationships with a child is seen as the worst thing since unsliced bread. Their interview with Stinson Hunter was a DISGRACE! As is the legitimacy being given to this witchhunt by the Establishment. Yes, and I’d like to say one more thing that is pertinent to this topic: we all know that Russia is being encircled by the United States, and that there was a coup organised by the Ukraine By the United States. Yes! THis is why we are seeing so much of this ‘homophobia’ obsession. Actually, Putin’s nationalism is organised from above and all this unfair attacks on Russia merely make it worse for so-called gay people, as these attitudes are antagonised. Of course, this would take actual courage by the likes of that tosser Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie. If they really cared about boys they would object to the child on child abuse. But that would take ACTUAL COURAGE! Something these filthy cowards lack. Oh, and what is Fry doing saying that gay kids in Russia should be taught who Tchaikovsky was ! He is a confirmed paederast, so a terrible example. Also, he dated his nephew which is a bit off in my opinion. Or is the next thing going to be incest rights? I think it is, honestly. ANd now I see Sir Clement Freud has been ‘named’. I suppose they are going to take away his knighthood. It really makes me sick! His family not putting up much defence of him. Watching the video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvbn0IPV1vg ) of the accuser, notice she uses “empowered” so she’s just another feminist bitch looking for some money and ego. Sickening! Seriously, why do you girl lovers worship these creatures, women, when they are just so hideous!

Well, don’t worry, I shan’t be posting on this blog ever again as I have so much to do, and it’s clear people have been put off posting here because of my presence. So, goodbye.

>Those like Tony Blair, Obama and Owen Jones go around wrapping themselves in political correctness, the false friend of tolerance, saying Islam is a “religion of peace”, and inventing the word Islamophobia, which they warn against even as they continue to kill Muslims.

Not sure Owen Jones has killed any Muslims, Cid.

>I shan’t be posting on this blog ever again as I have so much to do, and it’s clear people have been put off posting here because of my presence.

Yes, I think that may be true. Shame, really, because not everything you say is nonsense. Short and sweet (or just a little less violently bitter) would help, but I am guessing that is temperamentally beyond you.

I agree with your statement about the UK versus Russia. Of course we have corruption and vigilantes, but I think it correct to state ours is individuals and not institutional. Generally speaking Britain is a good place to live. I have no intention of emigrating.

According to my Russian associate (whom I now have long lost touch with), President Putin is corrupt. Indeed, he is much connected with the Russian Mafia. And my instincts tell me he is a latent/closet homosexual hebephile, despite his reputation for being a serial womaniser.

America! That is a sick culture, one which finds murder less repulsive than a girl in a bikini. Just look (literally) at American porn: it’s very misogynistic and is essentially rape.

As I mentioned in my previous post, I still support Putin on the international stage, as the US is “the great satan”. And more so if either Trump or Clinton become the POTUS.

What in particular makes you think he is a paederast? I see no one single example.

I hope you are not seriously suggesting his blowing into a pre-pubescent boy’s stomach was explicitly sexual in nature. Because that is something ALL adults USED to do to kids. I’m sure some must have done it to me.

Or are you referring to the beautiful boy of fifteen who danced at the Sochi Olympics?

“Generally speaking Britain is a good place to live. I have no intention of emigrating.”

Will you still think that when Britain adopts the same policies toward the minor attracted as America? Nasty long sentences with psychiatric intervention, and other prisoners shitting in your meals.

This country is about to make a MASSIVE swing to the “right”, meaning basically the destruction of the kind of liberalism that prevents the kind of horrors we read about in America, which is merely a facade for the trendy Islingtonite-type elite to enrich themselves.

I predict things will get VERY BAD for those like yourself, if your identity is found out, so be discreet!

Sadly, El Cid, since the 1980s the liberals have viciously attacked and demonized MAPs as much as any group of conservatives. During that era, they transformed into centrists, meaning most of them make sure to swing “right” on any issue that the mainstream doesn’t approve of them supporting. They typically have as much courage as Dorothy Gale’s leonine friend.